Avatar feed
Responses: 1
SGT Disabled Veteran
1
1
0
Ok, things obviously didn't go well for Trump today. One thing I never understood about this case is, when you are charged with fraud, there is normally and injured party. Who is the injured party in this case? It's not the banks, or they would have been the ones to sue him. They say he wildly over estimated his net work, if the banks thought that was the case, then they would be obliged to verify his assets to see if it was true. They didn't do that. They were confident that Trump would be able to repay the loans, or they wouldn't have loaned him the money. So who was swindled out of any money? It wasn't the banks. Trumps repaid the loans, with interest, so the banks actually made money off of him. I don't understand who the injured party in the case was. No one lost any money.
(1)
Comment
(0)
SGT Unit Supply Specialist
SGT (Join to see)
7 mo
SGT (Join to see) .


what you're saying has some merit for a normal person... not 45... he's a Con... trust me. Goodnight Jeff.
Later...
(2)
Reply
(0)
SGT Disabled Veteran
SGT (Join to see)
7 mo
Well the law is suppose to be equal for everyone right. From the President all the way down to the homeless person. I understand your point of view though.
(0)
Reply
(0)
MSG Stan Hutchison
MSG Stan Hutchison
7 mo
He violated the law, he should pay.
(2)
Reply
(0)
SGT Disabled Veteran
SGT (Join to see)
7 mo
MSG Stan Hutchison - Yes, but supposidly it was against the banks, so why didn't the banks sue him?
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small

Join nearly 2 million former and current members of the US military, just like you.

close